Hawthorn FC worst nightmare the 2017 Draft

[Pessimistic]

Be interesting to see how Hawks approach trading at end of season. Be an insight into how they see where they are at

As was last years

 

[Saint]

So Just to recap:

Other posters think:

• Hawks got rid of lewis and mitchell too soon, too cheaply, made a balls up because they could still be contending, only intended to get rid of one
• Hawks have lots of old slow players and should be replacing them as quickly as possible (except michell and Lewis in point 1)
• Hawks shouldn't try to speed up the process: no other team has ever rebuild under seven years so why should they (its borderline unfair)
• Clarko's a temperamantal loose cannon, and somehow has been a great coach but its really the assistants who are now departed who were the real brains
• Hawthorns players dont rate, they were in the right place at the right time ( or three times to be exact) However once a player leaves he has been an absolute champion and in some cases tin the top 50 in the last 25 years
• They paid too much for omeara in picks swaps, and vickery in contract value, even more so because they arent instantly taking us to top four status which was our assessment wrongly last year
• Its even more embarrassing because bigfooty is eagerly waiting the pick number of the one traded to st kilda, no doubt the poor kid drafted will be scrutinised every week by people with nothing better to do
• The club is delusional, the supporters are delusional, or they have abandoned already, bandwaggoners that they are
• Just because they have been quite successful, it doesnt mean the club will continue this way. didnt they go bust last time they were this successful?
• Most other organizations continue to be successful, but with hawthorn the success means they are closer to folding altogether

Did I miss anything?

The club was standing at a precipice at the end of last year. All their A-Grade players were approaching retirement age at the end of 2017. In hindsight, there wasn't much else the club could do other than what they did except perhaps get something decent in return.

Mitchell is still providing output, so they'd probably be better with him than without.

I reckon the Lewis trade to Melbourne was lose-lose so far. Might change if the Dees make the finals and really need Lewis' experience.

Didn't get enough back for Hill either, he's probably the biggest loss for the club.

I seriously think the major problem has been with messaging from the club. Clarko continually said they were contenders early in the season, many supporters (and the odds were saying the same thing). The club and supporters are realising some of their players are pretty ordinary on the front-line.

Vickery was a mistake, but despite the whole AFL world telling Hawthorn this, supporters and the club were adamant he would turn it around if he just came to Hawthorn. O'Meara has a bung knee, again, Hawthorn fans have insisted this will miraculously heal because of the wonder-juice at Hawthorn. Jury is out on this, but again, the messaging has been poor, bringing him back only for him to be out seemingly indefinitely.

It's not so much the outcomes as the head-in-the-sand approach of Hawthorn as a club and as a group of supporters, it's a serious delusion and the truth is slowly dawning on them than the glory days are over. The biggest risk is if the club goes into the next trade period still believing their own hype. No club has been successful without good draftees and the likelihood of drafting good players increases as you get earlier in the draft.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

He wanted three years. He's not going to be much chop in three years time and that's the catalyst to him getting the flick.

Good on him for getting the deal he wanted at Melbourne.

After he was told he was going to be traded.

 

[Bradkli]

After he was told he was going to be traded.

Exactly....Lewis thought Clarko was going to ask him to be captain not chat to him about playing somewhere else. Had what Lewis thought was going to happen actually did happen , do people actually think he would have said "no Clarko, I don't want to be captain unless I get a three year contract"...please...he would have been more than happy to sign a one year deal at the Hawks and be captain... The way it was handled by Clarko was an absolute disaster, a massive stuff-up and the complete opposite to the way Mitchell's exit was handled.

 

[Pessimistic]

The club was standing at a precipice at the end of last year. All their A-Grade players were approaching retirement age at the end of 2017. In hindsight, there wasn't much else the club could do other than what they did except perhaps get something decent in return.

Mitchell is still providing output, so they'd probably be better with him than without.

I reckon the Lewis trade to Melbourne was lose-lose so far. Might change if the Dees make the finals and really need Lewis' experience.

Didn't get enough back for Hill either, he's probably the biggest loss for the club.

I seriously think the major problem has been with messaging from the club. Clarko continually said they were contenders early in the season, many supporters (and the odds were saying the same thing). The club and supporters are realising some of their players are pretty ordinary on the front-line.

Vickery was a mistake, but despite the whole AFL world telling Hawthorn this, supporters and the club were adamant he would turn it around if he just came to Hawthorn. O'Meara has a bung knee, again, Hawthorn fans have insisted this will miraculously heal because of the wonder-juice at Hawthorn. Jury is out on this, but again, the messaging has been poor, bringing him back only for him to be out seemingly indefinitely.

It's not so much the outcomes as the head-in-the-sand approach of Hawthorn as a club and as a group of supporters, it's a serious delusion and the truth is slowly dawning on them than the glory days are over. The biggest risk is if the club goes into the next trade period still believing their own hype. No club has been successful without good draftees and the likelihood of drafting good players increases as you get earlier in the draft.

Almost to a man we said these recruits would take time. Absolutely we did. Less time than the draft picks selections would though

Tell me this. Would anyone drafted end 2016 have got game time without injuries?
Actually no

 

[Leeda]

it is fantasy that people always pick on the low draftees to do something immediately.

crying poor is something that some always like to do.

but poor is a relative concept... think about it..

it is also a very stupid word and looks funny as well as being kind of relative.

 

[Ants]

So Just to recap:

Other posters think:

• Hawks got rid of lewis and mitchell too soon, too cheaply, made a balls up because they could still be contending, only intended to get rid of one
• Hawks have lots of old slow players and should be replacing them as quickly as possible (except michell and Lewis in point 1)
• Hawks shouldn't try to speed up the process: no other team has ever rebuild under seven years so why should they (its borderline unfair)
• Clarko's a temperamantal loose cannon, and somehow has been a great coach but its really the assistants who are now departed who were the real brains
• Hawthorns players dont rate, they were in the right place at the right time ( or three times to be exact) However once a player leaves he has been an absolute champion and in some cases tin the top 50 in the last 25 years
• They paid too much for omeara in picks swaps, and vickery in contract value, even more so because they arent instantly taking us to top four status which was our assessment wrongly last year
• Its even more embarrassing because bigfooty is eagerly waiting the pick number of the one traded to st kilda, no doubt the poor kid drafted will be scrutinised every week by people with nothing better to do
• The club is delusional, the supporters are delusional, or they have abandoned already, bandwaggoners that they are
• Just because they have been quite successful, it doesnt mean the club will continue this way. didnt they go bust last time they were this successful?
• Most other organizations continue to be successful, but with hawthorn the success means they are closer to folding altogether

Did I miss anything?

Well, you're conflating many different posters, who have different opinions, into a single "this is what other posters think" argument, so what you missed was context and subtlety.

As for my opinion.

Hawthorn/Clarkson said they could keep both Lewis & Mitchell, that it wasn't salary cap that forced their hand. They said they were aiming at contending this year. They traded out their early 2017 picks which appears to support this, and got in some older RFA/UFA players to play bit roles.

I don't actually mind this. Except it seems contradictory. If 2017 was really a contending year, why not keep two players who might have a short term impact, and made up a big chunk of the engine room? Doing everything else and letting these two players go seems a mistake to me.

I also believe O'Meara was just too expensive full stop. But it's hard to ever measure that as you don't really know what the "what ifs" truly were.

Now, there is also the third possible mistake, that won't be proven for a few years, that they just generally over-rated the list. O'Meara's cost if you finish low on the ladder was extreme, with a reasonable degree of risk perceived to be attached. Players like Vickery and Henderson don't help long term. If this call was the wrong call, then using those 2017 picks on O'Meara, and topping up will be a big failure. But, trading Mitchell & Lewis will be the right call then.

We won't know on some of those for a few years yet. I've always rated Clarkson, and if he's got the fire in the belly for a full rebuild I wouldn't go anywhere else. You're list management team have a few question marks though in my book, as after a strong period of success, I do question decisions like Vickery, Henderson, O'Rourke and O'Meara. Maybe too much belief that Hawthorn could fix players. But you may prove me wrong.

 

[Leeda]

Well, you're conflating many different posters, who have different opinions, into a single "this is what other posters think" argument, so what you missed was context and subtlety.

As for my opinion.

Hawthorn/Clarkson said they could keep both Lewis & Mitchell, that it wasn't salary cap that forced their hand. They said they were aiming at contending this year. They traded out their early 2017 picks which appears to support this, and got in some older RFA/UFA players to play bit roles.

I don't actually mind this. Except it seems contradictory. If 2017 was really a contending year, why not keep two players who might have a short term impact, and made up a big chunk of the engine room? Doing everything else and letting these two players go seems a mistake to me.

I also believe O'Meara was just too expensive full stop. But it's hard to ever measure that as you don't really know what the "what ifs" truly were.

Now, there is also the third possible mistake, that won't be proven for a few years, that they just generally over-rated the list. O'Meara's cost if you finish low on the ladder was extreme, with a reasonable degree of risk perceived to be attached. Players like Vickery and Henderson don't help long term. If this call was the wrong call, then using those 2017 picks on O'Meara, and topping up will be a big failure. But, trading Mitchell & Lewis will be the right call then.

We won't know on some of those for a few years yet. I've always rated Clarkson, and if he's got the fire in the belly for a full rebuild I wouldn't go anywhere else. You're list management team have a few question marks though in my book, as after a strong period of success, I do question decisions like Vickery, Henderson, O'Rourke and O'Meara. Maybe too much belief that Hawthorn could fix players. But you may prove me wrong.

you're being mighty nice partner.. but the point is that those who don't think will immediately imagine that they have to read horoscopes to find out what to do...

the draft is what it is and we already knew that players will come and a few will go and we will have a bit of a free fall..

everyone else will try to break the balls of the hawks but as clarko says.. we do it the hard way and we get it right eventually..

 

[F_therest]

Lewis and Mitchell have been pretty average for their new clubs this year and only going to decline from here...

Them staying may have made Hawks' fall less severe, but ultimately they were always in for a big fall.

 

[Leeda]

and striving for your best will always render a future full of heart ache when you are not striving well enough.

still seeing wallace and grommet in my early morning dreams.. they are kind of well if you don't know
who they are then they are not your kind of dog and whipper smith...

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Exactly....Lewis thought Clarko was going to ask him to be captain not chat to him about playing somewhere else. Had what Lewis thought was going to happen actually did happen , do people actually think he would have said "no Clarko, I don't want to be captain unless I get a three year contract"...please...he would have been more than happy to sign a one year deal at the Hawks and be captain... The way it was handled by Clarko was an absolute disaster, a massive stuff-up and the complete opposite to the way Mitchell's exit was handled.

Lewis has actually said that this is not the case.

 

[Pessimistic]

I don't think anyone seriously thought Hawks would contend this year. If things had gone better might be a lot closer. The ladder is excruciatingly compressed but out injuries an harsh fixture means it is out of reach for us

There's draft draft draft in posts by critics BUT the club did fill up on draftees at the end of 2015. To do that you have to trade out and cut including lake and hale. The club did say back then 2 then 2 then 2 older
Stars would move on each year This appears not to have included Gibbo or Lewis so add +2

Some posters post at great length but gloss over these things because they show the club has been planning for a while and that doesn't fit the 'Hawks suddenly turned to shit in one off season' line or the 'got too big for their boots' line

Part of our scepticism is the Burgoyne trade, the Gibson trade, the hale trade were all soundly ridiculed in bigfooty. We tended to pay'overs' then and now

In fact go back far enough there was derision for taking rough before Tambling (including many Hawks posters) partly because terry Wallace had declared he has outwitted the other clubs
In fact the appointment of Clarko was ridiculed including Quartermaine while reading the news
If you made a film out of this they'd say the plot was unlikely but I digress

 

[Richo83]

So Just to recap:

Other posters think:

Hawks got rid of lewis and mitchell too soon, too cheaply, made a balls up because they could still be contending, only intended to get rid of one

Even with Mitchell and Lewis, I doubt Hawthorn would be competing, it's not just the midfield but a misfiring backline and forwardline, coupled with improvement from other sides. I think Hawthorn received less than what they should have with the two, but moving them on was smart.

Hawks have lots of old slow players and should be replacing them as quickly as possible (except michell and Lewis in point 1)

Agree except the brackets.

Hawks shouldn't try to speed up the process: no other team has ever rebuild under seven years so why should they (its borderline unfair)

Hawthorn shouldn't cut corners, period.

Clarko's a temperamantal loose cannon, and somehow has been a great coach but its really the assistants who are now departed who were the real brains

No Clarkson is a genius. As long as he wants to coach them, the club should hold onto him, he's arguably the most important asset the club has.

Hawthorns players dont rate, they were in the right place at the right time ( or three times to be exact) However once a player leaves he has been an absolute champion and in some cases tin the top 50 in the last 25 years

No they've had plenty of stars, but the kicking gameplan has been worked out to an extent through handballing and pressure, and some players have suffered from natural declines of form with age.

They paid too much for omeara in picks swaps, and vickery in contract value, even more so because they arent instantly taking us to top four status which was our assessment wrongly last year

Did Hawthorn expect to finish top four? I don't know, but I do think the O'Meara trade was a bad move. Vickery was ridiculous, he's even worse at Hawthorn than at Richmond, and he was rubbish at Richmond at the end. His defensive efforts are weak and he doesn't put in the second and third efforts to lead and make a presence. His ruck work is mediocre and it's telling that he's only kicked five or more goals in a game once, and that was in a bloodbath against Collingwood.

Its even more embarrassing because bigfooty is eagerly waiting the pick number of the one traded to st kilda, no doubt the poor kid drafted will be scrutinised every week by people with nothing better to do

Bigfooty is obsessed with discussing whether high draft picks are busts or will be, no doubt. You can tell we're an obsessive bunch by how many of us jump on here on draft day to discuss whether we won or lost the draft.

That said, I think St Kilda's first pick will come with less burdens given he's not going to go to a bottom four side (most likely) and wont be St Kilda's only high pick (unless they trade out).

The club is delusional, the supporters are delusional, or they have abandoned already, bandwaggoners that they are

There's a few (including a few moderators just quietly) who I think are a little in denial. I think the bandwagoners call is cheap and I'll leave the bandwagon and crowd rumination to the memberships, attendances and big four obsessives brigade, that's not my thing.

Just because they have been quite successful, it doesnt mean the club will continue this way. didnt they go bust last time they were this successful?

Hawthorn will be fine. But yes, supporters expecting that the club will rise up again because the past ten years have been successful are kidding themselves. Every major club, especially in a league decided by a salary cap, drafting and equalisation will have its down days. The Celtics rose and fell, so did the Lakers, so did the Patriots, so did the Bulls, Yankees, Cardinals etc. So will the Warriors and the Cavaliers. And sometimes the falls last longer than some hope or presume.

Most other organizations continue to be successful, but with hawthorn the success means they are closer to folding altogether
Did I miss anything?

Again, Hawthorn will be fine.

 

[Pessimistic]

Also there's a few coaches etc at other clubs from hawthorn meaning there's less pushovers among the competition

(Than ten years ago)

 

[Blue1980]

We understand what you say MAY be true but just as easily not

And I forgot our young players are no good simply because thy aren't early draft picks. Until they depart hawthorn that is

The younger players may turn out to be okay, but it would take the most optimistic to think they will form the basis of a strong side.

I look to what they have done thus far, and compared to other clubs youth it is comfortably got the least upside and current credentials.

I can be wrong but I doubt it.

If hawthorn get out of this quicker than expected, it will be on the back majorly of players who aren't at the club yet.

 

[Leeda]

where's that sandbox?

the hedonistic approach appears too easy.. shove over Derm and others. cos you know best... let us get sorted...

 

[Richo83]

I don't think anyone seriously thought Hawks would contend this year. If things had gone better might be a lot closer. The ladder is excruciatingly compressed but out injuries an harsh fixture means it is out of reach for us

There's draft draft draft in posts by critics BUT the club did fill up on draftees at the end of 2015. To do that you have to trade out and cut including lake and hale. The club did say back then 2 then 2 then 2 older
Stars would move on each year This appears not to have included Gibbo or Lewis so add +2

Some posters post at great length but gloss over these things because they show the club has been planning for a while and that doesn't fit the 'Hawks suddenly turned to shit in one off season' line or the 'got too big for their boots' line

Part of our scepticism is the Burgoyne trade, the Gibson trade, the hale trade were all soundly ridiculed in bigfooty. We tended to pay'overs' then and now

In fact go back far enough there was derision for taking rough before Tambling (including many Hawks posters) partly because terry Wallace had declared he has outwitted the other clubs
In fact the appointment of Clarko was ridiculed including Quartermaine while reading the news
If you made a film out of this they'd say the plot was unlikely but I digress

People who call teams winners and losers straight after a draft are idiots. As for the trades, there's a difference between trying to trade for specific needs, which is what those trades were for, and trying to build a midfield from trades, which is generally hard to do.

 

[SA HAWK]

Years of trading out 1st rounders for established players has come back to bite us but was worth it to win premierships.

 

[stfan]

Years of trading out 1st rounders for established players has come back to bite us but was worth it to win premierships.

And one cannot argue with that.

Though this thread is more about what happened at the end of 2016 and where the Hawks go from there.

 

[Saint]

Almost to a man we said these recruits would take time. Absolutely we did. Less time than the draft picks selections would though

Tell me this. Would anyone drafted end 2016 have got game time without injuries?
Actually no

More revisionism. Granted it was said at the start O'Meara would take time. But most were saying Vickery would be a revelation, Mitchell is a known quantity and there aren't really any other recruits to speak of (that's the problem).

The problem with rebuilding a list is that it takes time. You need to draft players, then they don't come good for a year or two (more for the big fellas). Some play AFL in their first year and play well (McGrath, Selwood)

This is where Hawthorn are in a worse spot now than prior to the last trade period. They have no draft picks at the end of this year. By the time they get one decent draft pick (end of 2018) and that player is out on the park it will be around 2020 and all the current B-Graders like Breust and Smith will be passing their prime and approaching replacement age. This is why everyone outside of Hawthorn fans are suggesting offering up these type of player for draft picks this year to at least bring forward some of the influx of talent to 2019. It's what most other clubs in the same position have done and they're now all above Hawthorn so it can't be a terrible plan.

There's the option of trading in good players at the expense of more draft picks and for $ or free agents which cost even more $$$ and are actually pretty rare and Hawthorn are now coming at this from a position of weakness (bottom of the ladder). This seems to be what Hawthorn fans are pinning their hopes to. Even if they landed Fyfe for their first and second round draft picks in 2018 (similar to the Geelong/Dangerfield trade) would they really be that much better off, or just kick the can further down the street?

 

[Richo83]

Vickery's form has surprised them, this is arguably his worst season and he's gone backwards from being fairly poor at the end of his career at Richmond.

 

[Pessimistic]

This is where Hawthorn are in a worse spot now than prior to the last trade period. They have no draft picks at the end of this year. By the time they get one decent draft pick (end of 2018) and that player is out on the park it will be around 2020 and all the current B-Graders like Breust and Smith will be passing their prime and approaching replacement age. This is why everyone outside of Hawthorn fans are suggesting offering up these type of player for draft picks this year to at least bring forward some of the influx of talent to 2019. It's what most other clubs in the same position have done and they're now all above Hawthorn so it can't be a terrible plan.

There's the option of trading in good players at the expense of more draft picks and for $ or free agents which cost even more $$$ and are actually pretty rare and Hawthorn are now coming at this from a position of weakness (bottom of the ladder). This seems to be what Hawthorn fans are pinning their hopes to. Even if they landed Fyfe for their first and second round draft picks in 2018 (similar to the Geelong/Dangerfield trade) would they really be that much better off, or just kick the can further down the street?

Those other clubs are at best one or two wins above hawthorn (BIG WOOP) and, to be brutal, theve had no success. Geelong is doing the best and they've traded more than drafted.

some clubs are in the second decade of gutting too much and harming the fabric (btw Anderson traded in 2015 for pick 18 ( I think)) so by all means have your clubs follow your superb plan. makes it easier for clubs like hawthorn geelong and sydney if your other clubs are voluntarily kneecapping themselves

You can blather on all you want but you cant hardly quote any ACTUAL success via your wisdom (except ironically Hawthorn)

 

[joop]

Years of trading out 1st rounders for established players has come back to bite us but was worth it to win premierships.

Exactly. I'd take it anyday of the week.

 

[Pessimistic]

Vickery's form has surprised them, this is arguably his worst season and he's gone backwards from being fairly poor at the end of his career at Richmond.

The surprise form of Tim O'brien is keeping Vickerey out. Man we are GUTTED

 

[joop]

The surprise form of Tim O'brien is keeping Vickerey out. Man we are GUTTED

Fair to say you would be. Obrien isn't much chop and the fact he's keeping a guy out who you just bought it in speaks volumes for your off-season debacle last year.